The Rhaegar + Lyanna = Jon Thread, Part X

[Swanson's Stach]

Sorry, double post. How do I delete this?

[Swanson's Stach]

I admit it's all conjecture, I was just trying to come up with an alternative to R+L, and I think as alternatives go, this one could be true and not contradict any of the clues we have been given so far.

Sorry man, but the idea that Aerys is Jon's father is ridiculous, and this is the problem. You just want to have an alternative to Rhaegar being the father, you believe Jon is Targaryen, and Aerys is the only other option. So basically, you're starting with a conclusion and working backwards to find ways to support your conclusion. At least with the R+L theory, people are starting with what is known and going in the direction the facts point them.

And at this point, I think there has been enough back and forth with different arguments. It's time to make a bet.

I think there should make two bets: you bet that Aerys is Jon's father, and if anyone else is his father then you lose; while Dragonfish bets that Rhaegar is Jon's father, and if anyone else is Jon's father than he loses.

What are you willing to wager?

[Dragonfish]

Sorry man, but the idea that Aerys is Jon's father is ridiculous, and this is the problem. You just want have an alternative to Rhaegar being the father, you believe Jon is Targaryen, and Aerys is the only other option. So basically, you're starting with a conclusion and working backwards to find ways to support your conclusion. At least with the R+L theory, people are starting with what is known and going in the direction the facts point them.

At this point, I think there has been enough back and forth with different arguments. It's time to make a bet.

I think there should make two bets: you bet that Aerys is Jon's father, and if anyone else is his father then you lose; while Dragonfish bets that Rhaegar is Jon's father, and if anyone else is Jon's father than he loses.

What are you willing to wager?

Five gold dragons and half a groat...

More seriously, though, my main argument centers on which theory is better, not on who Jon's father will actually turn out to be. I've admitted at several points that nothing in the text explicitly refutes A+L=J (although I agree that Scabbard is just working backward from a conclusion), just that it's inadequate when compared to R+L=J. As far as theories go, it relies too much on baseless conjecture and raises more questions that must then be answered with further baseless conjecture. Scabbard, however, argues otherwise. That's what the conflict is really about for me.

[The Scabbard Of the Morning]

I don't think that's the case at all, in fact I'd argue that this theory answers more questions than the other one. You just simply decided arbitrarily that some issues aren't worth getting the answer to and pretend they don't exist.

For example, Brandon is a hothead is not an answer. Brandon would have to be much more than a hothead to do what he did, he'd have to be a complete moron who's dumber than Gregor Clegane. I simply do not buy that as an answer. Brandon might be rash but he's not that stupid. Why Brandon does what he should require an explanation better than "that Brandon, he dumb".

Now let's come from the perspective that Brandon is a reasonably intelligent person who can understand the consequences of his actions and knows that accusations against the Crown Prince is a guaranteed death penalty unless he had some solid proof.

Now let's work from this perspective and tell me how Brandon's reached the decision that he can go to KL and do what he did. How does he reach the level of certainty it would take for make that decision.

[Dragonfish]

I don't think that's the case at all, in fact I'd argue that this theory answers more questions than the other one. You just simply decided arbitrarily that some issues aren't worth getting the answer to and pretend they don't exist.

Pot calling the kettle black.

I have repeatedly attempted to address your arguments and point out their flaws. Many of my questions have gone unanswered, almost as if you're ignoring them. I have also offered reasons for why R+L=J offers better explanations than your theory does, but most of those points have gone unaddressed by you (save for the whole Brandon thing, which I'll address in a minute).

Now, would you please answer these questions:

1) Why would Aerys have Lyanna abducted and brought to him in order to be raped and killed when he simply could have had whoever was doing the abducting do the raping and killing as well?

2) How could Rhaegar have saved Lyanna right after she was raped but before she was killed? Why didn't Aerys kill her right after raping her?

3) What is inadequate about the explanation I've given for why many people think Lyanna was raped? This one is important, because much of your theory rests on the idea that the rape rumors can only be explained by Aerys raping her.

Brandon might be rash but he's not that stupid.

Uhh...yes he is. If you can't accept that basic premise then I don't know how else to argue this point with you.

Plenty of people do dumb things in this story. Aerys killing Brandon and Rickard was dumb. Catelyn kidnapping Tyrion was dumb. Eddard telling Cersei he knows her secret, then refusing Renly's aid, then trusting Littlefinger was dumb. Catelyn letting Jaime go was dumb. Robb marrying Jeyne was dumb. You'll notice a lot of the people doing dumb things here are Starks or people related to Starks.

The fact is, the only thing we know about Brandon's personality, the only thing the author has chosen to reveal about his character, is the fact that he's a hothead. GRRM could easily have written him as someone similar to Eddard, but he didn't. He made him a hothead for a reason, and that was so that it would be in character for him to storm into the throne room and make accusations against the Crown Prince.

Now let's come from the perspective that Brandon is a reasonably intelligent person who can understand the consequences of his actions...

Are we talking about the same Brandon here?

Now let's work from this perspective and tell me how Brandon's reached the decision that he can go to KL and do what he did. How does he reach the level of certainty it would take for make that decision.

No, I refuse to work from this premise, because it's false. Brandon was a hothead. He did something stupid. That's a perfectly adequate and in-character reason for the way he acted. No unrealistic speculation about Aerys framing Rhaegar is required.

[Talleyrand]

@Scabbard of the Morning

It goes like this: Lyanna goes missing. A rumour goes out that it was Rhaegar. Brandon, who we know is a rash person hears this. Brandon remembers Rheagar giving Lyanna the flower decides that it must be true. Brandon then acting irrationally gathers his friends and rides to KL.

What part about that don't you understand

[dcon]

Might have been brought up in one of the other versions of this thread but just came upon this quote. When Robert and Cersei see Ned after he's woken when Jamie attacked him, Robert says that Rhaegar won.

"Yet somehow he still won. He has Lyanna now,and I have her."

As I'm reading it now thinking that Ned isn't Jon's dad that quote is interesting. Maybe Robert did kill Rhaegar out of jealousy instead of revenge for raping Lyanna.

[Dragonfish]

One other thing:

Let's assume that Brandon is indeed this careful, rational person you seem to think he is. Why would any careful, rational person storm into the throne room and threaten the Crown Prince, even if they had proof? Would any careful, rational person expect a man known as the Mad King to give him a fair trial? Would he have expected Aerys to say, "Oh, you threatened my son, but your evidence is pretty valid so I'll let it slide"? No, even if you had proof of what Rhaegar did, it's incredibly stupid to burst into the Mad King's throne room and threaten his son. So really, both our theories rely on Brandon being stupid and hotheaded.

[Talleyrand]

Might have been brought up in one of the other versions of this thread but just came upon this quote. When Robert and Cersei see Ned after he's woken when Jamie attacked him, Robert says that Rhaegar won.

"Yet somehow he still won. He has Lyanna now,and I have her."

As I'm reading it now thinking that Ned isn't Jon's dad that quote is interesting. Maybe Robert did kill Rhaegar out of jealousy instead of revenge for raping Lyanna.

I always thought that quote was more Robert angry that Rhaegar was with Lyanna in death while he was stuck with the very living and bitchy Cersei

[The Scabbard Of the Morning]

Pot calling the kettle black.

I have repeatedly attempted to address your arguments and point out their flaws. Many of my questions have gone unanswered, almost as if you're ignoring them. I have also offered reasons for why R+L=J offers better explanations than your theory does, but most of those points have gone unaddressed by you (save for the whole Brandon thing, which I'll address in a minute).

Now, would you please answer these questions:

1) Why would Aerys have Lyanna abducted and brought to him in order to be raped and killed when he simply could have had whoever was doing the abducting do the raping and killing as well?

2) How could Rhaegar have saved Lyanna right after she was raped but before she was killed? Why didn't Aerys kill her right after raping her?

3) What is inadequate about the explanation I've given for why many people think Lyanna was raped? This one is important, because much of your theory rests on the idea that the rape rumors can only be explained by Aerys raping her.

Uhh...yes he is. If you can't accept that basic premise then I don't know how else to argue this point with you.

Plenty of people do dumb things in this story. Aerys killing Brandon and Rickard was dumb. Catelyn kidnapping Tyrion was dumb. Eddard telling Cersei he knows her secret, then refusing Renly's aid, then trusting Littlefinger was dumb. Catelyn letting Jaime go was dumb. Robb marrying Jeyne was dumb. You'll notice a lot of the people doing dumb things here are Starks or people related to Starks.

The fact is, the only thing we know about Brandon's personality, the only thing the author has chosen to reveal about his character, is the fact that he's a hothead. GRRM could easily have written him as someone similar to Eddard, but he didn't. He made him a hothead for a reason, and that was so that it would be in character for him to storm into the throne room and make accusations against the Crown Prince.

Are we talking about the same Brandon here?

No, I refuse to work from this premise, because it's false. Brandon was a hothead. He did something stupid. That's a perfectly adequate and in-character reason for the way he acted. No unrealistic speculation about Aerys framing Rhaegar is required.

Wait a minute, you've never seen Brandon in action ever before and you feel certain enough about him to proclaim him a complete moron? Dumber than Gregor who had the good sense to stand down when commanded despite being furious. And further more, not only is he a complete moron who doesn't understand the basics of medieval law that to falsely accuse the Crown Prince is a death sentence, him and all his companions all of whom were Westerosi nobility, that they were all as dumb as Hodor and none of them said, "maybe this is a bad idea without proof?" This is not a joke, this is theirs lives on the line, do real people act this callously when their head can be mounted on a pike?

This is what you consider a iron tight theory?

I can understand someone devoted to the R+L=J theory, fine, you like that theory better, it's a free country. But to not be aware enough to admit that this whole thing involving Brandon is at least on the surface questionable and requires an answer more nuanced than "they were all idiots", I don't even know what to say to that other than shake my head. I certainly hope we eventually get an answer from GRRM that is more satisfactory than "they were all idiots".

[Dragonfish]

Wait a minute, you've never seen Brandon in action ever before and you feel certain enough about him to proclaim him a complete moron? Dumber than Gregor who had the good sense to stand down when commanded despite being furious. And further more, not only is he a complete moron who doesn't understand the basics of medieval law that to falsely accuse the Crown Prince is a death sentence, him and all his companions all of whom were Westerosi nobility, that they were all as dumb as Hodor and none of them said, "maybe this is a bad idea without proof?" This is not a joke, this is theirs lives on the line, do real people act this callously when their head can be mounted on a pike?

Wait, are you talking about Gregor going apeshit during the tourney? Because as I recall, he didn't stop when his King commanded, he stopped after his brother started fighting him to a standstill. I might have that wrong, though...

As for your more general point, my last post (which you may have missed) addresses it better, so I'll repost it here:

Let's assume that Brandon is indeed this careful, rational person you seem to think he is. Why would any careful, rational person storm into the throne room and threaten the Crown Prince, even if they had proof? Would any careful, rational person expect a man known as the Mad King to give him a fair trial? Would he have expected Aerys to say, "Oh, you threatened my son, but your evidence is pretty valid so I'll let it slide"? No, even if you had proof of what Rhaegar did, it's incredibly stupid to burst into the Mad King's throne room and threaten his son. So really, both our theories rely on Brandon being stupid and hotheaded.

This is what you consider a iron tight theory?

I'd say it's a theory that's based on how people actually behave. To reiterate, one of the only things we know about Brandon is that he was a hothead, so it's perfectly in keeping with his character to storm into the throne room.

I can understand someone devoted to the R+L=J theory, fine, you like that theory better, it's a free country. But to not be aware enough to admit that this whole thing involving Brandon is at least on the surface questionable and requires an answer more nuanced than "they were all idiots", I don't even know what to say to that other than shake my head. I certainly hope we eventually get an answer from GRRM that is more satisfactory than "they were all idiots".

As I say above, both are theories rely on Brandon being an idiot, so I think you should stop this line of questioning.

But more generally, there's a strong theme running through the books that people do stupid and irrational things out of love. That's why Jaime threw Bran out the window, why Catelyn freed Jaime, why Robb married Jeyne. And it was probably part of why Brandon stormed into the throne room, and maybe even why Lyanna ran off with Rhaegar. Plenty of people in the story do stupid things, so I don't think there's anything wrong with a theory that takes that into account, especially when it comes to character we know to be a hothead.

ETA--Oh, and you still haven't answered my 3 questions. Here they are again:

1) Why would Aerys have Lyanna abducted and brought to him in order to be raped and killed when he simply could have had whoever was doing the abducting do the raping and killing as well?

2) How could Rhaegar have saved Lyanna right after she was raped but before she was killed? Why didn't Aerys kill her right after raping her?

3) What is inadequate about the explanation I've given for why many people think Lyanna was raped? This one is important, because much of your theory rests on the idea that the rape rumors can only be explained by Aerys raping her.

[zmflavius]

Wait a minute, you've never seen Brandon in action ever before and you feel certain enough about him to proclaim him a complete moron? Dumber than Gregor who had the good sense to stand down when commanded despite being furious. And further more, not only is he a complete moron who doesn't understand the basics of medieval law that to falsely accuse the Crown Prince is a death sentence, him and all his companions all of whom were Westerosi nobility, that they were all as dumb as Hodor and none of them said, "maybe this is a bad idea without proof?" This is not a joke, this is theirs lives on the line, do real people act this callously when their head can be mounted on a pike?

This is what you consider a iron tight theory?

I can understand someone devoted to the R+L=J theory, fine, you like that theory better, it's a free country. But to not be aware enough to admit that this whole thing involving Brandon is at least on the surface questionable and requires an answer more nuanced than "they were all idiots", I don't even know what to say to that other than shake my head. I certainly hope we eventually get an answer from GRRM that is more satisfactory than "they were all idiots".

Think about all the kings and lords who've been mentioned in the series so far. Imagine if some crazy knight rode into their front yard and demanded that their son (who is not at home) come out and answer for his "crimes" or they'd drag him out and kill him. Do you really think they would have done anything other than arrest them and shut them up in a dungeon?

Whether Brandon is smart or stupid is besides the point, as smart people do on occasion do hideously stupid things. Brandon clearly never thought about what might happen if he threatened a pyromaniac's son, of a dynasty which really had a law where touching a blood royal could be punished by losing a hand. Unless you have an alternate theory?

[Kaitscralt]

The Starks tend to do what they feel is right regardless of their own well-being. We see it time and time again. It's a kind of stupidity, I guess, but I wouldn't say entirely moronic.

[KingSnow]

Whether Brandon is smart or stupid is besides the point, as smart people do on occasion do hideously stupid things. Brandon clearly never thought about what might happen if he threatened a pyromaniac's son, of a dynasty which really had a law where touching a blood royal could be punished by losing a hand. Unless you have an alternate theory?

One thing that occured to me was if word of Brandon bursting into the throne room threatening the Crown Prince was a little embelished by Aerys. Maybe Brandon was a little less bludgeoning than that. Perhaps all he and his friends did was go into the throne room and asked where Rheagar is (yes, Brandon probably would have been very very direct about it). Aerys then (being the Mad King and all) arrests him for "trying to kill the Crown Prince" and spreads word around that Brandon kicked the doors down and was frothing at the mouth like a mad wolf (ha).

[Dragonfish]

One thing that occured to me was if word of Brandon bursting into the throne room threatening the Crown Prince was a little embelished by Aerys. Maybe Brandon was a little less bludgeoning than that. Perhaps all he and his friends did was go into the throne room and asked where Rheagar is (yes, Brandon probably would have been very very direct about it). Aerys then (being the Mad King and all) arrests him for "trying to kill the Crown Prince" and spreads word around that Brandon kicked the doors down and was frothing at the mouth like a mad wolf (ha).

IIRC, we learn about Brandon storming into the throne room from Jaime, who witnessed the event and doesn't really have a reason to embellish things.

[KingSnow]

IIRC, we learn about Brandon storming into the throne room from Jaime, who witnessed the event and doesn't really have a reason to embellish things.

Oh yeah, forgot about that. Ok then, completely disregard what I said then.

[iamthedave]

Wait, are you talking about Gregor going apeshit during the tourney? Because as I recall, he didn't stop when his King commanded, he stopped after his brother started fighting him to a standstill. I might have that wrong, though...

The way it goes down is that Gregor tries to kill Loras, the Hound stops him, and the pair start fighting. It's made very clear that Gregor tries repeatedly to kill Sandor but can't, and eventually Robert uses his King's voice and Gregor stops a moment later.

So when he actually realizes the King's told him to stop, he does.

[Talleyrand]

The way it goes down is that Gregor tries to kill Loras, the Hound stops him, and the pair start fighting. It's made very clear that Gregor tries repeatedly to kill Sandor but can't, and eventually Robert uses his King's voice and Gregor stops a moment later.

So when he actually realizes the King's told him to stop, he does.

And the twenty men around him pointing swords at him. That helps i'd assume

[Errant Bard]

for r+l there are little facts. We have rhaegar's sentence "the dragon has three heads" and "song of ice and fire". we have his obsession with TPTWP. we have a lot of hints about R and L having been romantically involved ("died for the woman he loved" or "died whispering a woman's name" or simply R. choosing L as queen of love and beauty). There aren't such hints referring to aerys (*)

As I said, if you're willing to consider as supporting facts such things as madness (or obsession), romance, or plain rumours by people who know nothing about the real situation, then it's inconsistent to discard things like Aerys' madness, rape record, Rhaegar's disappearance from his father's court, his wish to "make changes" upon returning, or Ned and Ashara's romance, and the rumours about them loving each others.

Rereading... "died for the woman he loved", a fact, seriously? when it's a bard tale known in the whole Westeros? Next time you know, Tyrion and Sansa will really have killed Joffrey, because it's a little fact that people say they did.

I'm also baffled by the semantic leap making "a woman's name" mean "Lyanna" used as an indisputable fact to support another arguments.

(Oh, yes, Rhaegar clearly had been smitten by Lyanna, but really, 90% of the things brought up as facts supporting R+L=J have less substance than anything put in favour of alternate theories)

If we consider jon as a product of starks and targs, rhaegar is the most likely answer just because he's the simplest. The only difference is that Aerys's involvement would make all the situation more complicated, as someone posted above.

Hmm... "if we start from the conclusion, then..." is hardly a good argument, and past that, there's little more complication, and arguably less in some areas, with a straight kidnapping and rape than with eloping to make a baby and save the world. Especially considering that the simplest scenario, anyway, is Ned loving some woman before the war, and bringing the kid home after. One more or one less hoop in the clusterfuck that is the kidnapping/prophecy/war/love triangle of Targaryen Jon is of little consequence.

(and besides, Occam's Razor does not work for fiction, and especially not for fantasy. Brilliant guy benefiting from his family's aura? No, hidden heir with Aryan hyperborean super-special blood. Normal war? No, war to save the world from eldritch abominations. One death, who killed him, the ones who benefited from it? No, an evil mastermind with a decades-long grudge. Walk into fire, don't die, get dragons. Liberate slaves, don't lose them, have them become your personal army. get biggest army and support, don't win, be killed by a random shadow, and it goes on)

[LadyMary]

(*)[To be fair, there is a hint of jon being aerys's - his eyes that are "dark grey, almost black" (i can't provide a reference, but i'm pretty sure about it). almost the same color of aerys's eyes. But this is just a little detail]

I'm trying to remember where it was, but didn't Daenarys dream about her brother Rhaegar and that he had indigo colored eyes? Indigo is very dark blue, almost black.

Stockholm Syndrome maybe?

After being raped? I doubt it. Robert would not believe his beloved Lyanna would submit willingly to Rhaegar, but he barely knew her and has an idealized memory of her. I think the "rape" part of the story is because that's what King Robert wanted to believe happened. Ned's a bit more circumspect about what actually happened to Lyanna but doesn't dispute the King's official account (I think probably because it protects his sister's reputation and doesn't want to piss off the King or raise suspicion about Jon's parentage).